While developing instructional materials it is imperative to consider issues of diversity in the process. This is important so as not to create materials where “the restricted and stereotypical way in which ethnicity and gender are presented...conveys a negative message to students and can have an alienating effect on students who cannot identify with the [materials] (Volman & van Eck, 2001). Teachers and those involved in developing learning materials must be aware of the possible cultural biases that often find their way into learning materials. The two types of biases that are typically found are those in the language used in the materials and the references made in those materials (Alessi & Stanley 2001). Those stakeholders involved in the development of learning materials should be aware of stereotypical uses of pronouns where “groups are placed in stereotypical roles” and using images where genders are represented in equally stereotypical roles (Alessi & Stanley, 2001). It is also important to understand that “complete elimination of ethnic [gender] or cultural references is both impossible and undesirable because the instruction would become bland and uninteresting” (Alessi & Stanley, 2001). In short, it is important to be aware of the level at which instructional materials are an example of a diverse and unbiased representation of materials.
I. Definition of Diversity
Diversity is defined as, "the condition of having or being composed of differing elements: variety; especially the inclusion of different types of people (such as people of different races or cultures)" Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 2 Mar. 2018.
II. Definition of Instructional Design
Instructional design is defined as "the systematic development of instructional specifications using learning and instructional theory to ensure the quality of instruction. It is the entire process of analysis of learning needs and goals and the development of a delivery system to meet those needs."
This link will help readers understand the various definitions for a variety of instructional design principles. This can serve as a great resource to not confuse or misinterpret the different types of instructional design and the elements and characteristics that make up each one.
Click on the image to link to website for additional information.
Seven Forms of Dias in Instructional MaterialsThis link takes the user through a variety of interactive tools to learn and practice what they know. The flashcards can help reinforce your understanding of instructional diversity and bias.
Click on the image below to access the website for additional resources. This link will help you engage your diverse group of students by teaching you how to create culturally inclusive lessons. The article provides three simple steps to culturally responsive teaching.
Theme 1: Socio-economic Status
When developing diverse instructional materials in education, a multitude of factors must be considered in order to make the materials accessible to all students from many diverse backgrounds. One specific area to consider is the socioeconomic status (SES) of the students who will be interacting with the instructional materials being developed. SES is a common theme discussed when considering diversity because the different backgrounds that students come from have an effect on their skills and success in the classroom. Alongside SES, gender and race are often discussed because they share many commonalities.
Studies have shown how different instructional strategies and materials can vary, based on the poverty level of students attending a school. In a study by Bodovski and Farkas (2007), it was concluded that students in low-SES schools were given more autonomous worksheets and strategies, compared to high-SES students who received instruction and learning that was more student-centered. Additionally, Georges (2009) concluded that the achievement and success of students is strongly determined by their SES background and is typically less for students from low-SES backgrounds. If studies are showing that students from low-SES backgrounds are less successful in academics, the instructional materials that these students are interacting with, must be accessible to them.
With the consideration of student technology skills and information and communication technology (ICT), instructional materials that incorporate technology components also need to be considerate of student's SES backgrounds. As Ritzhaupt, Liu, Dawson, and Barron (2013) states, “lower-SES families generally have less access to ICT in their homes” and “children of lower-SES families are less likely to be proficient users of ICT” (p.300-301). This can hinder student progress with instructional materials in the classroom because students are not receiving further practice with the technology tools. This is also concerning for educators who plan to use or are using technology alongside their instructional materials because students with less ICT and technology skills, will be at a disadvantage with the instructional materials.
In a different study, the researchers examined potential socioeconomic bias in the screening measures for middle school students. “The current study examined ORF and Maze for evidence of bias across two subgroups known to be at increased risk for failure in reading: (a) students with learning disabilities and (b) students from low-income households” (Stevenson, N. A., D.K., & Tighe, E.L. (2016). This study is interesting because the results did not find significant bias within socioeconomic status of the students being tested. “Results indicate no significant differences in predictive validity for students from low-income households compared to students from middle and upper income households” (Stevenson, N. A., D.K., & Tighe, E.L. (2016). With these considerations, one must be mindful of the instructional materials being developed, in order to allow for equal access to students from diverse backgrounds, with special consideration to socioeconomic status, gender, and race.
Theme 2: Gender
Diversity creates a realm of possibilities for differentiation when developing instructional materials for teachers and students. However, diversity can be dismantled when biases are consciously and unconsciously present within the deliverer of instruction. As well, chosen instructional materials used to carry out a specific lesson can have an impact on the overall learning goal. Gender biases are a common area which have the potential to deconstruct a strong diverse learning experience for students. It impacts the representation of women and minorities within the fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM).
Gender biases in textbooks have been found to negatively influence students’ interests an achievement in science. This is of particular concern for women and the underrepresentation of minority groups. When students are not represented equitably in books, they are less interested in engaging with them (Ragusa, 2017). Underrepresentation and stereotypes among males and females within the fields of STEM have had profound effects upon diverse instructional learning experiences. Within textbooks, women are often represented as “passive participants” rather than “active agents”(Ragusa, 2017). It is unfortunate that gender biases are present among children as early as elementary age in the educational disciplines of STEM. Girls as young as six years old have been found to rate their math ability lower than boys, even when no actual difference in ability exist. They are more likely to draw a man than a woman when asked to draw a scientist or someone who is good at math or science(Courey, 2017). However, with the enhancement of teacher preparation programs producing teachers in support of societal change, there are a number of strategies and tools to combat these instructional biases and continue to build diverse instructional foundations. Providing students with personalized instruction with daily focuses that build motivation in the field of STEM will work toward eliminating such biases. In addition, connecting students with same gender role models who have been successful in the field of STEM will help students to change thier personal gender stereotypes. These strategies can help to breakdown the stereotypes and biases and in turn create an instructional system that supports diversity. As mentioned in themes one and three other strategies and tools can help to promote diversity and overturn the stereotypes and disparities found with instructional design in regards to SES and race.
Theme 3: Race
Racial biases are also a common theme when examining instructional materials that support diversity. Gender and racial biases are identified in various instructional materials by determining whose interest is being portrayed and whose interest is being excluded (Arnold & Doctoroff, 2002). SES and racial background are strongly related, as well as the influence of culture on learning styles. “As multicultural education is becoming integral to the core curriculum, teachers often implement this aspect into their courses through literature. However, standards and criteria to teach and promote active discussion about this literature are sparse (Gates & Hall 2010).” Gates and Hall push for the increase in materials that could better serve this purpose. When educators are developing instructional materials, they must consider cultural background. Predominant educational approaches may not be effective for all children and according to Arnold and Doctoroff, research shows that culturally accommodated approaches seem to facilitate student participation and reduce problem behaviors. Barriers are encountered in implementing technology in the classroom, and the main barrier that schools face in using technology effectively in the classroom is cultural lag (Chen, 2007). Students in low socio-economic areas are part of the digital divide because of the lack of technological devices at home. Implementing technology in the classroom requires teachers to think about how culture plays a role in designing instructional materials. The way information is organized, which can be analytically focused, can be a disadvantage to ethnic minorities. In order to make software and other technology related instructional materials culturally appropriate, information should be interactive while incorporating visualization with auditory stimuli which can engage learners. Also, the role of the teacher should be less formal and authoritative and more facilitative. According to Chen, knowledge and language significantly impact learning and should not be overlooked in the education of multicultural students.
Finally, just as with gender biases, racial representation biases within instructional materials can cause inequality in the learner's experience. Instructional materials and software that don't include multicultural influences can cause students to feel neglected or underrepresented, thus becoming uninterested. Educators should consider representing all cultures while designing instructional materials to ensure diversity in schools.
Arnold, D., & Doctoroff, G. (2003). The early education of socioeconomically disadvantaged children. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 517-545.
Bodovski, K., & Farkas, G. (2007). Do instructional practices contribute to inequality in achievement? Journal of Early Childhood Research, 5, 301–322.
Brooks-Gunn, Jeanne, & Duncan, Greg J. (1997). The Effects of Poverty on Children. Future of Children, 7(2), 55-71.
Chen, C. (2007). Cultural diversity in instructional design for technology-based education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(6), 1113-1116.
Davila, D. & Volz, A. (2017). That Sh*t Is Rude! Religion, Picture Books, and Social Narratives in Middle School. Middle Grades Review, v3 n3, 1-15.
Gates, P. S., & Hall Mark, D. L. (2010). Cultural Journeys: Multicultural Literature for Elementary and Middle School Students. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Georges, A. (2009). Relation of instruction and poverty to mathematics achievement gains during kindergarten. Teachers College Press, 111, 2148–2178.
McGlynn, C. & London, T. (2011). Leadership for inclusion: conceptualizing and enacting inclusion in integrated schools in a troubled society. Research Papers in Education, 28:2, 155-175.
Ritzhaupt, A., Liu, F., Dawson, K., & Barron, A. (2013). Differences in Student Information and Communication Technology Literacy Based on Socio-Economic Status, Ethnicity, and Gender. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(4), 291-307.
Stevenson, N. A., Reed, D. K., & Tighe, E. L. (2016). Examining Potential Bias in Screening Measures for Middle School Students by Special Education and Low Socioeconomic Status Subgroups. Psychology In The Schools, 53(5), 533-547.
Zhong, Zhi-Jin. (2011). From Access to Usage: The Divide of Self-Reported Digital Skills among Adolescents. Computers & Education, 56(3), 736-746.
Tracy Kane
Jillian Oswald
Table of Contents
Dandrea Safford
Introduction:
While developing instructional materials it is imperative to consider issues of diversity in the process. This is important so as not to create materials where “the restricted and stereotypical way in which ethnicity and gender are presented...conveys a negative message to students and can have an alienating effect on students who cannot identify with the [materials] (Volman & van Eck, 2001). Teachers and those involved in developing learning materials must be aware of the possible cultural biases that often find their way into learning materials. The two types of biases that are typically found are those in the language used in the materials and the references made in those materials (Alessi & Stanley 2001). Those stakeholders involved in the development of learning materials should be aware of stereotypical uses of pronouns where “groups are placed in stereotypical roles” and using images where genders are represented in equally stereotypical roles (Alessi & Stanley, 2001). It is also important to understand that “complete elimination of ethnic [gender] or cultural references is both impossible and undesirable because the instruction would become bland and uninteresting” (Alessi & Stanley, 2001). In short, it is important to be aware of the level at which instructional materials are an example of a diverse and unbiased representation of materials.
I. Definition of Diversity
Diversity is defined as, "the condition of having or being composed of differing elements: variety; especially the inclusion of different types of people (such as people of different races or cultures)"
Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 2 Mar. 2018.
II. Definition of Instructional Design
Instructional design is defined as "the systematic development of instructional specifications using learning and instructional theory to ensure the quality of instruction. It is the entire process of analysis of learning needs and goals and the development of a delivery system to meet those needs."
http://umich.edu/~ed626/define.html
This link will help readers understand the various definitions for a variety of instructional design principles. This can serve as a great resource to not confuse or misinterpret the different types of instructional design and the elements and characteristics that make up each one.Seven Forms of Dias in Instructional Materials This link takes the user through a variety of interactive tools to learn and practice what they know. The flashcards can help reinforce your understanding of instructional diversity and bias.
Click on the image below to access the website for additional resources. This link will help you engage your diverse group of students by teaching you how to create culturally inclusive lessons. The article provides three simple steps to culturally responsive teaching.
Theme 1: Socio-economic Status
When developing diverse instructional materials in education, a multitude of factors must be considered in order to make the materials accessible to all students from many diverse backgrounds. One specific area to consider is the socioeconomic status (SES) of the students who will be interacting with the instructional materials being developed. SES is a common theme discussed when considering diversity because the different backgrounds that students come from have an effect on their skills and success in the classroom. Alongside SES, gender and race are often discussed because they share many commonalities.
Studies have shown how different instructional strategies and materials can vary, based on the poverty level of students attending a school. In a study by Bodovski and Farkas (2007), it was concluded that students in low-SES schools were given more autonomous worksheets and strategies, compared to high-SES students who received instruction and learning that was more student-centered. Additionally, Georges (2009) concluded that the achievement and success of students is strongly determined by their SES background and is typically less for students from low-SES backgrounds. If studies are showing that students from low-SES backgrounds are less successful in academics, the instructional materials that these students are interacting with, must be accessible to them.
With the consideration of student technology skills and information and communication technology (ICT), instructional materials that incorporate technology components also need to be considerate of student's SES backgrounds. As Ritzhaupt, Liu, Dawson, and Barron (2013) states, “lower-SES families generally have less access to ICT in their homes” and “children of lower-SES families are less likely to be proficient users of ICT” (p.300-301). This can hinder student progress with instructional materials in the classroom because students are not receiving further practice with the technology tools. This is also concerning for educators who plan to use or are using technology alongside their instructional materials because students with less ICT and technology skills, will be at a disadvantage with the instructional materials.
In a different study, the researchers examined potential socioeconomic bias in the screening measures for middle school students. “The current study examined ORF and Maze for evidence of bias across two subgroups known to be at increased risk for failure in reading: (a) students with learning disabilities and (b) students from low-income households” (Stevenson, N. A., D.K., & Tighe, E.L. (2016). This study is interesting because the results did not find significant bias within socioeconomic status of the students being tested. “Results indicate no significant differences in predictive validity for students from low-income households compared to students from middle and upper income households” (Stevenson, N. A., D.K., & Tighe, E.L. (2016). With these considerations, one must be mindful of the instructional materials being developed, in order to allow for equal access to students from diverse backgrounds, with special consideration to socioeconomic status, gender, and race.
Theme 2: Gender
Diversity creates a realm of possibilities for differentiation when developing instructional materials for teachers and students. However, diversity can be dismantled when biases are consciously and unconsciously present within the deliverer of instruction. As well, chosen instructional materials used to carry out a specific lesson can have an impact on the overall learning goal. Gender biases are a common area which have the potential to deconstruct a strong diverse learning experience for students. It impacts the representation of women and minorities within the fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM).
Gender biases in textbooks have been found to negatively influence students’ interests an achievement in science. This is of particular concern for women and the underrepresentation of minority groups. When students are not represented equitably in books, they are less interested in engaging with them (Ragusa, 2017). Underrepresentation and stereotypes among males and females within the fields of STEM have had profound effects upon diverse instructional learning experiences. Within textbooks, women are often represented as “passive participants” rather than “active agents”(Ragusa, 2017). It is unfortunate that gender biases are present among children as early as elementary age in the educational disciplines of STEM. Girls as young as six years old have been found to rate their math ability lower than boys, even when no actual difference in ability exist. They are more likely to draw a man than a woman when asked to draw a scientist or someone who is good at math or science(Courey, 2017). However, with the enhancement of teacher preparation programs producing teachers in support of societal change, there are a number of strategies and tools to combat these instructional biases and continue to build diverse instructional foundations. Providing students with personalized instruction with daily focuses that build motivation in the field of STEM will work toward eliminating such biases. In addition, connecting students with same gender role models who have been successful in the field of STEM will help students to change thier personal gender stereotypes. These strategies can help to breakdown the stereotypes and biases and in turn create an instructional system that supports diversity. As mentioned in themes one and three other strategies and tools can help to promote diversity and overturn the stereotypes and disparities found with instructional design in regards to SES and race.
Theme 3: Race
Racial biases are also a common theme when examining instructional materials that support diversity. Gender and racial biases are identified in various instructional materials by determining whose interest is being portrayed and whose interest is being excluded (Arnold & Doctoroff, 2002). SES and racial background are strongly related, as well as the influence of culture on learning styles. “As multicultural education is becoming integral to the core curriculum, teachers often implement this aspect into their courses through literature. However, standards and criteria to teach and promote active discussion about this literature are sparse (Gates & Hall 2010).” Gates and Hall push for the increase in materials that could better serve this purpose. When educators are developing instructional materials, they must consider cultural background. Predominant educational approaches may not be effective for all children and according to Arnold and Doctoroff, research shows that culturally accommodated approaches seem to facilitate student participation and reduce problem behaviors. Barriers are encountered in implementing technology in the classroom, and the main barrier that schools face in using technology effectively in the classroom is cultural lag (Chen, 2007). Students in low socio-economic areas are part of the digital divide because of the lack of technological devices at home. Implementing technology in the classroom requires teachers to think about how culture plays a role in designing instructional materials. The way information is organized, which can be analytically focused, can be a disadvantage to ethnic minorities. In order to make software and other technology related instructional materials culturally appropriate, information should be interactive while incorporating visualization with auditory stimuli which can engage learners. Also, the role of the teacher should be less formal and authoritative and more facilitative. According to Chen, knowledge and language significantly impact learning and should not be overlooked in the education of multicultural students.
Finally, just as with gender biases, racial representation biases within instructional materials can cause inequality in the learner's experience. Instructional materials and software that don't include multicultural influences can cause students to feel neglected or underrepresented, thus becoming uninterested. Educators should consider representing all cultures while designing instructional materials to ensure diversity in schools.
Cultural Bias in Instructional Materials (Link to Prezi)
References:
Arnold, D., & Doctoroff, G. (2003). The early education of socioeconomically disadvantaged children. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 517-545.
Bodovski, K., & Farkas, G. (2007). Do instructional practices contribute to inequality in achievement? Journal of Early Childhood Research, 5, 301–322.
Brooks-Gunn, Jeanne, & Duncan, Greg J. (1997). The Effects of Poverty on Children. Future of Children, 7(2), 55-71.
Chen, C. (2007). Cultural diversity in instructional design for technology-based education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(6), 1113-1116.
Courey, Sibyl. (2017). Schools and Closing the Gender Gap. Center of Mental Health Schools in UCLA. Los Angeles, CA. http://smhp.psych.ucla.edu/pdfdocs/gengap.pdf
Davila, D. & Volz, A. (2017). That Sh*t Is Rude! Religion, Picture Books, and Social Narratives in Middle School. Middle Grades Review, v3 n3, 1-15.
Gates, P. S., & Hall Mark, D. L. (2010). Cultural Journeys: Multicultural Literature for Elementary and Middle School Students. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Georges, A. (2009). Relation of instruction and poverty to mathematics achievement gains during kindergarten. Teachers College Press, 111, 2148–2178.
McGlynn, C. & London, T. (2011). Leadership for inclusion: conceptualizing and enacting inclusion in integrated schools in a troubled society. Research Papers in Education, 28:2, 155-175.
Ritzhaupt, A., Liu, F., Dawson, K., & Barron, A. (2013). Differences in Student Information and Communication Technology Literacy Based on Socio-Economic Status, Ethnicity, and Gender. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(4), 291-307.
Stevenson, N. A., Reed, D. K., & Tighe, E. L. (2016). Examining Potential Bias in Screening Measures for Middle School Students by Special Education and Low Socioeconomic Status Subgroups. Psychology In The Schools, 53(5), 533-547.
Zhong, Zhi-Jin. (2011). From Access to Usage: The Divide of Self-Reported Digital Skills among Adolescents. Computers & Education, 56(3), 736-746.
Introduction, Additional Links and Resources: Tracy Kane
Theme 1: Socio-Economic Status: Jillian
Theme 2: Gender Dandrea Safford
Theme 3: Race Angela Castelli